C++ Anyone?
-
Ha! My templates'll kick sand in your generics's faces like the 50 pound weaklings they are! ;P
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
BTW, Generics are much, much more functional than templates, and we all know we're all going functional, hey?
-
BTW, Generics are much, much more functional than templates, and we all know we're all going functional, hey?
To be serious for a moment…C++ templates actually make-up a compile-time pure functional programming language over the C++ type system, possibly (probably, I'm not entirely sure) with lazy evaluation as well. So I suspect they're rather more functional than the C# generics :-)
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
-
To be serious for a moment…C++ templates actually make-up a compile-time pure functional programming language over the C++ type system, possibly (probably, I'm not entirely sure) with lazy evaluation as well. So I suspect they're rather more functional than the C# generics :-)
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
Now that you explained that, the jury is still out (I only know that C# generics are not purely compile time, in that they are only JIT compile time, and seem to have been aimed at furthering the functional qualification of the .NET languages, of course starting with C#). Generics, including function types like lambdas and delegates, seem to have been part of a conspiracy to use LINQ as a subtle wedge in the door to bring C# up to the functional expectations of the non-MS world. It seems to be working.
-
I'm looking into getting back into software development. I think this is the perfect opportunity to consider abandoning MS/.net and get on the solid platform that C++ has to offer. Are there any C++ programmers out there that program in C++ because they like it more than .net?
Why are people down-voting CSS on this post? You might think he's a poes on the SoapBox, but a totally legitimate developer question should not attract down-votes. You people can often be such small minded poesses. (Sorry if I didn't spell that right)
-
WPF, in my opinion, it is for junk software. That crap that comes with store bought computers and add-on hardware is super-bloated junk that tries to compete with all the other software for the users attention by using big round flashing buttons and giant windows with nothing of real substance in them. I want to write real code that isn't some marketing scam from MS that is going to become obsolete in a year or two and force everyone to learn another three letter acronym and buy a whole new bookshelf full of books.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
WPF, in my opinion, it is for junk software.
Well, that's interesting. Why are you using windows at all then ? That's obviously just a scam, you should be using a command line only.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
I want to write real code that isn't some marketing scam from MS that is going to become obsolete in a year or two and force everyone to learn another three letter acronym and buy a whole new bookshelf full of books.
Well, C++ is obviously trapped in a certain period in time and is unlikely to progress too much, so you're right that that is where you should be. C would perhaps work for you even better.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Why are people down-voting CSS on this post? You might think he's a poes on the SoapBox, but a totally legitimate developer question should not attract down-votes. You people can often be such small minded poesses. (Sorry if I didn't spell that right)
While I agree, he's pretty much brought it upon himself IMO.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
To be serious for a moment…C++ templates actually make-up a compile-time pure functional programming language over the C++ type system, possibly (probably, I'm not entirely sure) with lazy evaluation as well. So I suspect they're rather more functional than the C# generics :-)
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
C# generics are plain anaemic compares to C++ templates. It's part of the overall design philosophy to make C# easy to use rather than powerful if there's ever a choice between the two. That's serious, I was told that by the C# team.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
No.
errr... Yes.
-
I'm looking into getting back into software development. I think this is the perfect opportunity to consider abandoning MS/.net and get on the solid platform that C++ has to offer. Are there any C++ programmers out there that program in C++ because they like it more than .net?
That is what I will do. You feel part of some sort of nobility (albeit recognized only by your peers) when you can run the whole gamut of ATL, WTL, STL. It's the .Net Framework that killed C++ on Windows and only the framework. If librairies as complete and unified could enter the arena, the language would be revived by popular demand. But I am pessimistic. Nevertheless, although a chilly pain since its inception due to the asinian lack of librairies, C++ is still firmly anchored. It ages well and it remains definitely OK for cross-platform development (wxWidgets, Qt and others ...).
-
That is what I will do. You feel part of some sort of nobility (albeit recognized only by your peers) when you can run the whole gamut of ATL, WTL, STL. It's the .Net Framework that killed C++ on Windows and only the framework. If librairies as complete and unified could enter the arena, the language would be revived by popular demand. But I am pessimistic. Nevertheless, although a chilly pain since its inception due to the asinian lack of librairies, C++ is still firmly anchored. It ages well and it remains definitely OK for cross-platform development (wxWidgets, Qt and others ...).
Simple Inheritance wrote:
Nevertheless, although a chilly pain since its inception due to the asinian lack of librairies,
Agreed. The lack of some sort of standardized libraries is incomprehensible. .NET and Java puts so many tools in the developer's hand while C++ only has STL to offer and
vertorisn't all it's made up to be.
"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, `Who is destroying the world?' You are."
-Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand -
Why are people down-voting CSS on this post? You might think he's a poes on the SoapBox, but a totally legitimate developer question should not attract down-votes. You people can often be such small minded poesses. (Sorry if I didn't spell that right)
-
I'm looking into getting back into software development. I think this is the perfect opportunity to consider abandoning MS/.net and get on the solid platform that C++ has to offer. Are there any C++ programmers out there that program in C++ because they like it more than .net?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
I'm looking into getting back into software development.
Professional or hobby?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
I think this is the perfect opportunity to consider abandoning MS/.net and get on the solid platform that C++ has to offer.
If it's for professional purposes, then try to look at what the market is asking.
-
Why are people down-voting CSS on this post? You might think he's a poes on the SoapBox, but a totally legitimate developer question should not attract down-votes. You people can often be such small minded poesses. (Sorry if I didn't spell that right)
Brady Kelly wrote:
Why are people down-voting CSS on this post?
Just a guess, since I didn't vote, but it may be due to the phrasing of his query.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
I think this is the perfect opportunity to consider abandoning MS/.net and get on the solid platform that C++ has to offer.
Go down to a bakers-convention and say "these electric ovens are crap, who thinks I'm right and wants to go back to an open fire in the backyard?" :cool:
I are Troll :)
-
WPF, in my opinion, it is for junk software. That crap that comes with store bought computers and add-on hardware is super-bloated junk that tries to compete with all the other software for the users attention by using big round flashing buttons and giant windows with nothing of real substance in them. I want to write real code that isn't some marketing scam from MS that is going to become obsolete in a year or two and force everyone to learn another three letter acronym and buy a whole new bookshelf full of books.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
I want to write real code that isn't some marketing scam from MS that is going to become obsolete in a year or two
Ahhh the dream. I always think Im doing well if I dont think my codes obsolete by the time its compiled.
pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Personal Music Player[^]
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
You people can often be such small minded poesses. (Sorry if I didn't spell that right)
How else would you spell poesses? I wonder what it's supposed to mean?
You might spell it with one 's'. It's the Afrikaans plural for a poes. The translation is not KSS, but I'm sure any young Afrikaans girls that might read this can hold their own.
-
C# generics are plain anaemic compares to C++ templates. It's part of the overall design philosophy to make C# easy to use rather than powerful if there's ever a choice between the two. That's serious, I was told that by the C# team.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Is true. C++ templates are pretty simple IF you consider the use cases possible with C# generics. Go beyond that (with templates) and you'd better now what you're doing! But as most developers use, rather than write templates, it's a moot point really.
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
-
WPF, in my opinion, it is for junk software. That crap that comes with store bought computers and add-on hardware is super-bloated junk that tries to compete with all the other software for the users attention by using big round flashing buttons and giant windows with nothing of real substance in them. I want to write real code that isn't some marketing scam from MS that is going to become obsolete in a year or two and force everyone to learn another three letter acronym and buy a whole new bookshelf full of books.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
WPF, in my opinion, it is for junk software
WPF is a UI framework, nothing more. It has a number of features that give it great appeal, once you've learned how to use it.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
That crap that comes with store bought computers and add-on hardware is super-bloated junk that tries to compete with all the other software for the users attention by using big round flashing buttons and giant windows with nothing of real substance in them.
The irony in that statement is that the people who develop crapware like that have been doing it since the dawn of personal computing. The only thing that changes is their methodology. WPF certainly isn't the cause.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^] -
Is true. C++ templates are pretty simple IF you consider the use cases possible with C# generics. Go beyond that (with templates) and you'd better now what you're doing! But as most developers use, rather than write templates, it's a moot point really.
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
Frankly, I've always thought that templates could be overused and abused just as badly as the preprocessor. I've seen heavily-templated code that was close to unreadable because the author was so entranced with doing everything via templates.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^] -
I'm looking into getting back into software development. I think this is the perfect opportunity to consider abandoning MS/.net and get on the solid platform that C++ has to offer. Are there any C++ programmers out there that program in C++ because they like it more than .net?
My current project, The Big New Thing™ is actually a mix. The front end application is C#/WPF, and the back end services are C++/MFC. Previous products were pure C++/MFC. The front end UI was vastly more involved to program than the new one has been. As always, pick the appropriate tool for the job.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^] -
Frankly, I've always thought that templates could be overused and abused just as badly as the preprocessor. I've seen heavily-templated code that was close to unreadable because the author was so entranced with doing everything via templates.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^]Gary R. Wheeler wrote:
Frankly, I've always thought that templates could be overused and abused just as badly as the preprocessor
Course they can. Anything can. OO, inheritance - they could be substituted for 'templates' in that sentence. But there's a difference between library code, which has a desire to be maximally reusable, and application code, which doesn't have that requirement. I'm quite happy to use libraries like Boost, which use templates like they were going out of fashion, but write that code? Na, not so much (although I have done at times when I needed to).
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p